Bennett and Beach: The Hypocrisy Of Congress's Gold-Plated
Health Care

Special subsidies for Hill workers trample on the Founders' code of equal application of the law.

By

William Bennett And

Christopher Beach

Sept. 23, 2013 7:11 p.m. ET

As close observers of history and human nature, James Madison and the other Founders of the U.S. Constitution knew that the equal and unbiased application of the law to all people, especially elected officials, is essential to freedom and justice and one of the primary safeguards from authoritarianism and oppression by a ruling class.

And so, referring to the members of Congress, James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 57: "[T]hey can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society."

Today, elected officials need to be reminded of these truths. Under pressure from Congress, the White House has carved out a special exemption for Congress and its staffers from ObamaCare—the law it recently deemed necessary for the entire country. No Republicans voted for ObamaCare. Yet it appears that some of them support the exemption President Obama approved on his own—so they would not have to go on record with a vote for or against it.

ENLARGE

Corbis

This is the height of hypocrisy, and worse, a trampling of the Founders' code of equal application of the law. Having forced a health law on the American people, the White House and Democrats now seek to insulate themselves from the noxious portions of the law, and from the implementation struggles, indecision and uncertainty that many other Americans face today.

In other words, Congress's health-care premiums will not rise, but yours may. Members of Congress will be able to afford to keep their health-insurance plan, but you may be kicked off yours. They will be able to afford to keep their doctors, but you may have to find a new one.

Rep. Ron DeSantis, a Republican from Florida, recently put forward legislation—aptly named the James Madison Congressional Accountability Act—which would end the special exemption. In the Senate, Republicans David Vitter of Louisiana and Mike Enzi of Wyoming have also introduced legislation to end the exemption.

In response, several Democratic senators have reacted by drafting legislation that would punish anyone who votes for Sen. Vitter's plan by permanently blocking an exemption from them and their staff, even if Mr. Vitter's law doesn't pass. It doesn't get more vindictive and petty than that.

All this began when Congress passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010. It compelled Congress and its staff to participate in ObamaCare and its insurance exchanges like other Americans who don't have employer-provided plans. But in their haste and confusion over legislation so long that few even read it all, some members of Congress voted for the law without realizing that the final bill had no mention of the very generous premium contributions the government makes to federal employees as part of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

Imagine the horror when these elected officials, who make $174,000 a year, realized that not only must they and their staffers be subject to inferior-quality health exchanges like the millions of ordinary Americans, but they might also have to shell out thousands of dollars for increased premiums if they exceed the subsidy income cutoff.

The White House, under heat from Congress, directed the Office of Personnel Management to carve out special rules so that the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program can continue to contribute to the health plans used by Congress and congressional staff.

Congress complains that without its special subsidies the Hill will suffer a "brain drain" as staffers leave their jobs because of increasing out-of-pocket insurance costs. Heaven forbid Congress suffer the same fate as private companies like UPS, which recently had to cut health-care benefits entirely for employees' spouses; or labor unions, like the 40,000 International Longshore and Warehouse Union workers who recently left the AFL-CIO citing as one factor ObamaCare's tax on their "Cadillac" health-care plans.

You'd think that the authors of ObamaCare would have been prepared to cope with its effects. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, has already put money aside in his budget to help supplement his staff's health-care costs in anticipation of the new law. Other congressmen should have done the same.

Regardless of whether or not they support ObamaCare, members of Congress should refuse the special exemption. The law they enacted should apply to them.

Mr. Bennett, a former secretary of education, is a fellow of the Claremont Institute, and host of the nationally syndicated radio show, "Morning in America." Mr. Beach is the show's executive producer.

Congress is required to get their health insurance from Obamacare plans:In subparagraph 1312(d)(3)(D), it states, “Notwithstanding any other provision of law . . . the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are–(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).” The Act defines Member of Congress as any member of the House of Representatives or the Senate and congressional staff as all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC."

So in fact if you get elected to Congress, you'll be REQUIRED to use the health exchanges, which aren't a bad thing. The health care isn't provided by the government, it's pre-existing insurance companies that are competing for the business.

This is one of lthe dumber of the WSJ articles about the health care law.

Members of Congress and their staff do not have a Cadilac insurance plan, any more than corporations do that still provide a plan. In fact, the plan available to staffers has many levels of choice, with changing rates and co-pay depending on how much coverage and risk you want. It is not a flat benefit, and in fact many corporations do have one plan with MAX benefits, as do some labor unions.

Also twisted, is protraying this as some special perk to congress, when in fact all employers until recently were EXPECTED to provide some sort of insurance: think of the staffers first as employees, who of course should get a plan. And, the plan is no different than what all but USPS and the military have.

Finally, EVERYBODY is entitled to hang on to their pre-existing health plan. Any one in the private sector is ALSO entitled to retain her or his plan.

The scandal now is that corporations are throwing their coverage for their employees over the side. The way the real scandal works is there have been increases for executive compensation, allowing those executives to cover whatever cadilac plan they want. The emplyees, on the other hand, most receiving far less than 10% of the pay packages of the executives are now getting a stipend designed, as we all know, to be inadequate as the years go on to provide reasonable health coverage. So the cynical thing, the scandal is that the employees are expected either to be stuck in the future with nothing, or go on Obamacare even though the plutocrats have been grousing about and trying to destroy that program. The program, the way things are going with the corporations dumping benefits for the workers, that will be the ONLY line of health defense for the workers.

Mr. Bennett is known to be a major intellect. For him to sign on to such a twisted presentation is not for illumination of the issue but just a cynical device to support twisted political posturing. Right when we need clarity, not all this heavy breathing. For shame !

Good grief!! Congress and congressional staffers are employees. Their employer, the federal government, provides their health insurance in the same way that the employers of 80% of Americans provide theirs. Because of the cries and lies of right wingers like this newspaper, they forced themselves off of the government health insurance program, and are now required to use the exchanges. If their employer still chooses to pay for their insurance, that is a good thing. What do you want, congress and congressional staffers whose employer is too stingy to pay for insurance?

Ah, actually I don't think so. You say that Obama "carved out" legislation to "spare" members of congress from having to participate in health exchanges, but....THAT'S NOT TRUE. First of all, the President doesn't "carve out" legislation. Second of all, where's your evidence? You don't have any!

It is true that the federal government will continue to pay for 75% of health insurance premiums for members of Congress and staffers - but only because staffers threatened to walk. Personally, the federal government should have let them.

So, even though members of Congress and congressional staffers will have to participate in the federally offered health insurance exchange - of their choice, as they will have a few to choose from - they will pay no more than 25% of their premiums and the federal government will pay the remainder.

Because of this, however, neither members of Congress nor their staffers will be entitled to any other subsidy, as other Americans would be. And why should they? Most people would be quite happy to have their employer pay 75% of their health insurance premium.

So stop lying, WSJ, and as far as who's the hypocrite? It seems to be YOU.

Reality of individual policies. My spouse and I turned 60 this summer. She has a pre-existing condition. Our group policy cost us about $6,000 per year and then under Cobra $1200 per month. Because I had taken a position with an employer with less than 20 employees, when that job ended there was neither COBRA or continuing coverage. That forced us in May into the individual policy market. The lowest quote was $3,000 per month with an individual $5,000 deductible and an unlimited 30% copay. I can see why many people do not have coverage, cannot afford coverage, or are almost forced into bankruptcy if there is an episode requiring hospital care. I also found that for pathology that the Pathologist who supervises the hospital lab where they have both exclusivity and receive payments for charity care billings, that they were billing $20 for each automated chemical lab test. Basic tests performed on a machine like blood typing, PTT, health panels, or urine analysis. Just about every insurer including Medicare and Medicaid do not allow these fees. If you do not have insurance or an insurance plan that is contracted, the pathologist may balance bill the doctors' full charge for these services. Just imagine how many lab tests are performed by the hospital for services there or at a physician's office on the uninsured and under insured. Something is wrong with the allocation of health dollars to the pockets of a few and not the needs of the citizens of the USA.

Spot on analysis as you would expect from Doctor Bennett and Mr. Beach. Unfortunately, most Americans are more interested in who will be Dancing with the Stars or what is wrong with the Steelers than the hypocrisy of our elected leaders regarding this issue. In fact, most people don't even pay attention to what is going to happen under the Unaffordable Care Act. As usual, our Supreme Leader will be able to sneak another fast ball by the outside corner whilst most of America just watches it go by!

He can visit every Brothel in the country if he can get that bill passed.as far and I'm concerned. But this is how the power brokers tighten their grip on anyone who wants to try and fix the train wreck. Nothing sells better than a sex scandal.

Enforcement of the law and the responsibility to abide by it began at the highest level, with the khan himself. In this manner, Genghis Khan had proclaimed the supremacy of the rule of law over any individual, even the sovereign. By subjugating the ruler to the law, he achieved something that no other civilization had yet accomplished. Unlike many civilizations—and most particularly western Europe, where monarchs ruled by the will of God and reigned above the law—Genghis Khan made it clear that his Great Law applied as strictly to the rulers as to everyone else. His descendants proved able to abide by this rule for only about fifty years after his death before they discarded it.

Weatherford, Jack (2005-03-22). Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (Kindle Locations 1665-1667). Broadway. Kindle Edition.

I am getting sick and tired of the WSJ. The WSJ wants to make a big deal of the fact that Obama and OPM interpreted the law to keep the government contribution/subsidy to Members of Congress and some of their staff flowing.

Sure, the WSJ wants to use the issue to raise the indignation of some Americans.

But, when Republicans such as US Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz are willing to really fight against the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (commonly referred to as Obamacare), the WSJ is right there stabbing Cruz and Lee in the back and taking perverse pleasure in twisting the knife.

Yes, this is aimed at Karl Rove and the other Big Government/Big Business types employed by the WSJ, and yes it is only a matter of time before I drop my WSJ subscription.

Seriously, I don't need to rely on the WSJ to profitably invest my few retirement dollars when the Fed is printing dollars and expanding its balance sheet to "historic" heights, with Wall Street and the WSJ cheering the Fed on.

THIS IS NOT THE CRUZ CAMPAIGN - THIS IS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DO NOT WANT OBAMACARE CRUZ CONSERVATIVE CAMPAIGN. The American People do not want Obamacare. We broke the fax machines telling Congress exactly that. We rallied at the capital saying the same thing, but the DEMOCRATS and OBAMA PAID NO ATTENTION TO US AND RAMMED THIS MONSTER OF TYRANNY DOWN OUR THROATS AND JOHN ROBERTS BETRAYED HIS OATH OF OFFICE BY WRITING HIS OWN LAW AND PASSING IT - OBAMA LECTURES OTHER LEADERS TO LISTEN TO THEIR PEOPLE BUT DISRESPECTS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.OBAMACARE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL - JOHN ROBERTS should be tarred and feathered AND Obama has no power to exempt anyone from any law - The American People should simply ignore the law - OBOZO ignores any law he doesn't like and then sue in court - Obama should be impeached but Democrats are spineless traitors to our Constitutional Republic and will not do their duty. The Democrat Party is the Party of DEATH, DESTRUCTION, HYPOCRISY, POVERTY, LIES, TYRANNY, STUPIDITY, HATRED at least Senator Cruz has guts - damnnnn Demorats -

Clearly, the best thing we can do, as a people is DUMP the 535. All must go. The replacements shall be required to take an oath they will not accept any money from anyone "for their elections." With one fell swoop all the lords and ladies of Wash., DC can and should be throne out. We will eliminate lobbyists as a profession.

Let's see, "Congress complains that without its special subsidies the Hill will suffer a "brain drain" as staffers leave their jobs because of increasing out-of-pocket insurance costs." I would imagine these staffers are making pretty good dough. I'll gladly take one of their positions and receive the lesser insurance.

On the phony claim that illegals will be required to have Obamacare, just how is that supposed to work.If the Illegals are not known, and the Government says they aren't;And if the Government doesn't know whether they are working, and they insist they do not;And if the Government doesn't know if they are both here and working, then how the hell do they know how much money they make?

The truth is, the Democrats have planned all along to give healthcare to them free, in return for the Hispanic vote. Why else would the Obama Administration be flogging all the free stuff way down in Mexico; as if the word is not already known from here to Patagonia!

This isn't about Obamacare this about the ability of the government, in this case elected officials but increasingly unelected or appointed bureaucrats, to inflict harm on the people who displease them. The bill intended to punish senators and their staffs for their votes is a harbinger of things to come. Following this example, Democratic legislators or bureaucrats (think Lois Lerner) beholden to Democrats may impose penalties or refuse exemptions to anyone they disagree with. Yes these people were duly elected or appointed or hired,but few if any are saints and if the power for mischief is there, it will be used. And the Obamacare system is a gigantic increase in the power to do mischief as has been repeatedly demonstrated.

The authors name Vitters and Enzi, who drafted a Senate bill to end the exemption for congress and staffers. They go on to say that "Democratic senators have reacted by drafting legislation" to punish anyone who votes for Vitters plan. Who are those democratic senators? Why didn't they publish their names?

I realize the WSJ is using this as a bully pulpit to complain about Obamacare, nevertheless the core message that Congress should be treated like everyone else is valid. So lets broaden the range to include more than just health insurance. How about retirement savings, pensions plans, insider trading laws, etc.?

Once again it is time for a constitutional convention to add term limits for congressmen and senators so that they can focus on doing what is right for the country and not for them. We must also demand that all of the benefits that they have given themselves be taken away. They can bring whatever benefits they earned from their last position to their new temporary position in Washington. Isn't it enough for them to be the citizen statesmen that they wanted to be when they ran for election?

Last I checked the Federalist Papers are not part of the constitution. However the Congress and Senate is composed of solid 1%ers so profiting at the expense of working tax payers is expected, and ever encourged.

But where was the outrage when Congress exempted itself from insider trading laws, or allowed themselves millions of farm subsidies or got exemptions for airline travel during sequestration.

And last I checked Congress was solidly GOP so who benefits the most from all these expensive perks, GOP.

If I'd been asked to assist Obama in taking down the GOP, ASAP, I'd have advised him to exempt Congress from the staggering costs of Obamacare. And watch how [they] respond.

These whining, overpaid $174,000.00 "public servants" [that's salary only, so it doesn't include probably around a cool $ 1,000,000.00, maybe much more--we have no idea--there is no disclosure) perks, travel, subsidies, etc.] guys and gals are going down big-time.

The "defunding" bit is a stunt to nowhere. Obama's minders are not brilliant, but they bring guns to a knife fight, and they are thugs and they are ruthless. The GOP greedy have been caught in the headlights, pants down.

Sorry Republicans....you never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. This is the issue that the public cares about. Congress....including Republicans...setting themselves apart from the public and "exempting" themselves from what the know is a disaster. Republicans can blather on about de-funding all they want and shoot their feet a few more times (they already look like Swiss cheese)....but the real issue is that the public has had it up to here (chin) with Congressional nonsense.

Do something or we will vote your behinds out of office....or make public sector malfeasance a capital crime.

Why should we care what a bunch of old white guys, most likely slave owners, thought about anything?

"And so, referring to the members of Congress, James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 57: "[T]hey can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society." Isn't that conventional thinking at MSNBC and 1600?

Remember not long ago when Congress got embarrassed by persistent insider trading stories. Congressmen would listen in on hearings affecting major corporations then run out and trade or short those stocks. Many from both parties made fortunes. Amazingly it was legal because they were exempt from the securities laws everyone else had to follow. After much media and citizen pressure Congress finally got a dose of integrity. The rule was changed and they have to follow the same laws as all other citizens. The Affordable Care Act seem like another Congressional exemption that needs a large integrity dosage.

"Imagine the horror when these elected officials, who make $174,000 a year, realized that not only must they and their staffers be subject to inferior-quality health exchanges like the millions of ordinary Americans, but they might also have to shell out thousands of dollars for increased premiums if they exceed the subsidy income cutoff."

I take exception to this statement, the options are not inferior-quality, in fact they are scaled good, better and best. Why our Congress and staffers wouldn't be happy with this is beyond me. Oh, sorry you don't meet the income requirements to receive tax credits. You should have read the law before you passed it!

Let's see how they handle the union's demands for changes to Obamacare, which may decimate their ranks. Healthcare benefits ar the biggest benefit negotiated by unions. If their members opt for the exchanges, there's not much of a need for unions any longer.

The article quotes Nancy Pelosi acknowledging the need for an exemption. The basic challenge is that powerful businesses, congress, etc are getting exemptions from "un-intended" consequences while the little folks are left to fend for themselves.

I don't disagree that the original provision put on Congress was harsh, but like so many other parts of this bill, it wasn't thought out and it is very hypocritical of Congress to complain and change the law while forcing others to abide by it who don't have the clout to petition for redress individually.

"And last I checked Congress was solidly GOP so who benefits the most from all these expensive perks, GOP."

Time to check again Earl.

Senate: Democrat

House: Republican

Not even a good attempt to put this on Republicans. This is all on the Democrats. They drafted this nightmare, they pushed it through without negotiating with Republicans on anything. You own it; lock, stock, and barrel.

I posted before reading yours. Two big, long fire trucks, and 3 fire dept. SUVs, carrying at least 50 people, pulled up out front and spent [almost an hour] before leaving. Most of the uniformed fire dept. people sat in their trucks or stood or sat on the curb, surfing their smart phones.

One truck lifted (automatically, not requiring effort by a person) a ladder with a light at its end, and aimed its light at the roof of a building across the street. A fire guy tried to climb the ladder but only got about 1/3 way up, then staggered, maybe unable to carry whatever he was carrying; a helper came up, took most of what appeared to be a light load, and both carefully backed down the ladder. Too many cocktails at dinner?

That cost taxpayers at least half a million$$$$$$$, easily. No explanation.

After 12 years in government one would start to lose touch. 2 terms in the house, 2 in the senate, then get back out on the street and contribute something to the GDP. Representation was never intended to be a career path.

Are you talking about a volunteer fire department or a paid one? The 'norms' of howmany vehicles appear at a particularly defined incident are fairly standard across most jurisdictions ( based on knowledge from a 10 years ago contract to work on such software systems for a major provider of said software to the likes of NYC and other big locations including some airports you may have visited) and the quantity has increased since 9/11. Most jurisdictions in my state have had to cut back on personnel and many states have had no additional funding to increase equipment upgrades. People do get charged real money for a false reports too.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.